Like Countable?

Install the App
TRY NOW

house Bill H.R. 2097

Should the ATF be Prohibited From Reclassifying Ammo as Armor Piercing Unless it’s Designed For Use in Handguns?

Argument in favor

The ATF should have clear guidelines for regulating armor piercing ammunition which this bill would provide, and ATF shouldn’t ban ammo that’s commonly used in rifles just because it can also be used in pistols.

Tooluser1's Opinion
···
08/18/2018
The ATF (and every OTHER Federal bureaucracy) should be prohibited from "reclassifying" any damn thing. Laws are solely the province of Congress. The ATF should be prohibited, unless it's the name of a new chain of stores.
Like (92)
Follow
Share
LibertyLou's Opinion
···
10/11/2018
Government shouldn't be allowed to prohibit anything, government needs to be prohibited from doing things, not vice versa.
Like (57)
Follow
Share
Leon's Opinion
···
10/11/2018
You could have stopped at ‘should the ATF be prevented’. The answer is yes.
Like (54)
Follow
Share

Argument opposed

ATF should have the ability to apply the ban on armor piercing ammunition to popular rifle rounds that can be used in handguns. Such ammo poses a threat to law enforcement officers wearing body armor.

Phillip's Opinion
···
10/11/2018
Why does any law abiding citizen need armor piercing ammunition. Get real. If it’s armor piercing it’s armor piercing. It doesn’t matter what you fire it from.
Like (157)
Follow
Share
IllWill's Opinion
···
10/11/2018
There is no reason for anyone to own armor-piercing rounds whether they’re using a rifle or a handgun. This legislation is absurd and a danger to public safety!
Like (100)
Follow
Share
Erin's Opinion
···
10/11/2018
I am ashamed that representatives of Pennsylvania sponsored this bill. If a bullet is armor piercing what difference does it make whether said bullet is fired from a hand gun or a rifle? Finally, why does anyone need to purchase armor piercing bullets?
Like (69)
Follow
Share
    The ATF (and every OTHER Federal bureaucracy) should be prohibited from "reclassifying" any damn thing. Laws are solely the province of Congress. The ATF should be prohibited, unless it's the name of a new chain of stores.
    Like (92)
    Follow
    Share
    Why does any law abiding citizen need armor piercing ammunition. Get real. If it’s armor piercing it’s armor piercing. It doesn’t matter what you fire it from.
    Like (157)
    Follow
    Share
    There is no reason for anyone to own armor-piercing rounds whether they’re using a rifle or a handgun. This legislation is absurd and a danger to public safety!
    Like (100)
    Follow
    Share
    I am ashamed that representatives of Pennsylvania sponsored this bill. If a bullet is armor piercing what difference does it make whether said bullet is fired from a hand gun or a rifle? Finally, why does anyone need to purchase armor piercing bullets?
    Like (69)
    Follow
    Share
    Government shouldn't be allowed to prohibit anything, government needs to be prohibited from doing things, not vice versa.
    Like (57)
    Follow
    Share
    You could have stopped at ‘should the ATF be prevented’. The answer is yes.
    Like (54)
    Follow
    Share
    Are you kidding me with this? Unless you plan on shooting cops or soldiers on the battlefield, YOU DO NOT HAVE ANY REASON TO POSESS AP ROUNDS. Period.
    Like (39)
    Follow
    Share
    Read the Second Amendment! A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
    Like (30)
    Follow
    Share
    It shouldn’t matter what type of gun is used, armor piercing is armor piercing. Why should civilians be allowed to shoot armor piercing ammunition from any kind of gun.
    Like (29)
    Follow
    Share
    While I believe that this issue is related to our 2nd Amendment rights, I do not believe there is a use for armor piercing ammunition in a civilized society. If we need armor piercing ammo in the case of protecting ourselves from the government, I’m sure that this legislation will not matter. We will make armor piercing ammo regardless of legislation in that situation.
    Like (22)
    Follow
    Share
    The original purpose of armor piercing ammo was to kill our enemy during wars/battles. The only purpose for it in civilian life would be to kill police. Just like assault weapons, there is no need of this ammo to kill a deer or bear. Regardless of weapon used, say NAY!
    Like (18)
    Follow
    Share
    Shall. Not. Be. Infringed.
    Like (17)
    Follow
    Share
    Shall not be infringed
    Like (16)
    Follow
    Share
    Only congress should be able to make laws governing the people, not an unaccountable agency.
    Like (14)
    Follow
    Share
    Armor-piercing is armor-piercing. Get the NRA out of our legislation. (Author of the bill has an A+ rating from the NRA. Can’t imagine why.)
    Like (12)
    Follow
    Share
    Armor piercing rounds have nothing to do with the right to bear arms. There is absolutely no reason for a civilian to need or use an armor piercing round and it poses a huge threat to our first responders.
    Like (11)
    Follow
    Share
    We need to abolish the AFT. All gun laws are infringement of my second amendment right. The ATF should have clear guidelines for regulating armor piercing ammunition which this bill would provide, and ATF shouldn’t ban ammo that’s commonly used in rifles just because it can also be used in pistols.
    Like (10)
    Follow
    Share
    Can it pierce armor? Then it’s armor-piercing. It doesn’t matter what make and model of murder weapon spits it out.
    Like (10)
    Follow
    Share
    Yes , the ATF has infringed on our 2nd Amendment rights far to much. Hard restraints need to be put in place on the ATF. #MAGA
    Like (10)
    Follow
    Share
    Any ammunition that can pierce body armor, regardless of what it is fired from, should be classified as armor piercing. Differentiation should not be made.
    Like (10)
    Follow
    Share
    MORE